Final answer:
Anti-Federalists opposed the Necessary and Proper Clause due to its potential to expand federal powers beyond the Constitution's express limits, advocating for a bill of rights to restrain such powers.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Anti-Federalists disliked the Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the elastic clause, because they believed it gave Congress too much power. They feared that Congress would legislate on matters well beyond what was intended by the Constitution's authors.
The power to make all laws that are necessary and proper for carrying out its responsibilities, as stated in Article I, Section 8, was seen by Anti-Federalists like Brutus (likely Robert Yates) as a potential for unchecked federal control over life, liberty, and property.
They argued for a bill of rights to place constraints on the federal government's powers. Over time, the use of the elastic clause has indeed enabled the national government to expand its authority, in areas such as establishing the Internal Revenue Service, supporting public education, and regulating interstate commerce.